logo

IDOM demands additional measures to guarantee electoral rights in mental institutions


https://www.ipn.md/index.php/en/idom-demands-additional-measures-to-guarantee-electoral-rights-in-mental-8012_1100668.html

The Moldovan Institute for Human Rights (IDOM) demands additional measures to guarantee the right to vote for patients in all medical and residential institutions, including psychiatric ones. During a press conference on Tuesday, IDOM director Vanu Jereghi gave the example of several institutions where the residents could not vote in the latest elections.

The Cocieri Placement Center for elderly and disabled people is under the jurisdiction of Moldova, but located near an illegal post installed by the de facto Transnistrian authorities and the mobile ballot box cannot reach there. Whereas in the past the center’s residents who wanted to vote were offered transportation, this year it was not possible. Out of 200 persons, six submitted an application to vote through the mobile ballot box and five of these couldn’t vote, while one person went independently to the polling station. In total, 35 persons from the Cocieri Center voted at the polling station.

At another institution, located in Hâncești, while the residents are not officially deprived of the right to vote, none of them cast votes. Vanu Jereghi believes it is because they simply didn’t know who to vote for as a result of not having access to information about the candidates.

Alexandru Cebănaș, a lawyer at the IDOM Monitoring and Reporting Program, noted that until recently, people with disabilities were completely restricted in their right to vote, by law and by the associated effect of the law. Before October 2018, people with disabilities declared incompetent could not vote, others could not vote either because they were associated with people declared incompetent. This was challenged at the Supreme Court, which found this to be a discrimination against persons with disabilities and those associated with persons with disabilities. This finding led the Constitutional Court to annul this restriction. Later, however, Parliament introduced another restriction, whereby the judge, when deciding whether to institute a protective measure, also rules on the right to vote. However, not all judges apply this rule and do not rule on this matter.

The lawyer mentions that compared to previous elections, participation in the exercise of the right to vote in placement centers and psychiatric hospitals was much more active, many residents participated, even if many spoiled their ballots, but this proves that people voted and express their own will in the voting.